Churches, Dealerships, and Franchises

[steve-in-kville]

That's correct- Womelsdorf.

At that time, the ladies were pushing for hanging veils and the conservative end was pushing back. IIRC, they needed a 2/3 majority vote to allow it. After a few tries, they got it.

[Judas Maccabeus]

That's correct- Womelsdorf.

At that time, the ladies were pushing for hanging veils and the conservative end was pushing back. IIRC, they needed a 2/3 majority vote to allow it. After a few tries, they got it.

Yeah. And permitting beards on men also. This is before my time.

Frankly, I do not like hanging veils in a setting where Mennonites are few and far between. To easy to get mistaken for a Nun. After this occurring repeatedly, my wife stopped wearing one. "Are you from Little Flower or the Shrine" gets old after awhile.

That does not mean I do not think that they are acceptable, just have their drawbacks in certain settings.

[Judas Maccabeus]

As I understand it the MB organisation is quite “flat” and congregations hold the power. I suspect institutions derived from the Kleine Gemeinde all have this model, because Holdemans are the same way. For whatever reason the old Swiss model did not prevail.

If I remember right, back then in KMF (15+ years ago) the congregations had some margin to work with on certain issues like technology and headcovering style. I also remember a local congregation withdrawing from the fellowship and affiliating with BMA.

But like I said, that was a while back.

If I understand correctly, current BMA policy would be to avoid such a “transfer” from a similar affiliation like KMF.

Really? I have not heard this, so I will ask my BMA contacts. If that is the case, it would explain certain things that I have observed.

[Josh]

If I remember right, back then in KMF (15+ years ago) the congregations had some margin to work with on certain issues like technology and headcovering style. I also remember a local congregation withdrawing from the fellowship and affiliating with BMA.

But like I said, that was a while back.

If I understand correctly, current BMA policy would be to avoid such a “transfer” from a similar affiliation like KMF.

Really? I have not heard this, so I will ask my BMA contacts. If that is the case, it would explain certain things that I have observed.

I don’t think it’s official written policy but overall they are trying to back away from “acquiring” dissatisfied congregations which are trying to transition more worldly. (They’d gladly take a CMC congregation that doesn’t want to trend more worldly tho, like the Bealeton/Cattlet, VA community)

[steve-in-kville]

I don’t think it’s official written policy but overall they are trying to back away from “acquiring” dissatisfied congregations which are trying to transition more worldly. (They’d gladly take a CMC congregation that doesn’t want to trend more worldly tho, like the Bealeton/Cattlet, VA community)

I think for a while KMF wasn't allowed to take on any LC churches after the original split. Not sure where I got that information though.

[Josh]

I don’t think it’s official written policy but overall they are trying to back away from “acquiring” dissatisfied congregations which are trying to transition more worldly. (They’d gladly take a CMC congregation that doesn’t want to trend more worldly tho, like the Bealeton/Cattlet, VA community)

I think for a while KMF wasn't allowed to take on any LC churches after the original split. Not sure where I got that information though.

That was the agreement the original Keystone pastors made with LMC when they brokered the deal to withdraw.

The other congregations that also wanted out of LMC typically joined BMA.

[Judas Maccabeus]

I don’t think it’s official written policy but overall they are trying to back away from “acquiring” dissatisfied congregations which are trying to transition more worldly. (They’d gladly take a CMC congregation that doesn’t want to trend more worldly tho, like the Bealeton/Cattlet, VA community)

I think for a while KMF wasn't allowed to take on any LC churches after the original split. Not sure where I got that information though.

That was the agreement the original Keystone pastors made with LMC when they brokered the deal to withdraw.

The other congregations that also wanted out of LMC typically joined BMA.

KMF churches only were part of the departure agreement if that came out with their bishops. It was the bishops that were involved in this.

I cannot find anything in writing. It appears to have been some kind of unwritten agreement. As far as I know, those who were an actual party to this are no longer available for comment.

[Josh]

I think for a while KMF wasn't allowed to take on any LC churches after the original split. Not sure where I got that information though.

That was the agreement the original Keystone pastors made with LMC when they brokered the deal to withdraw.

The other congregations that also wanted out of LMC typically joined BMA.

KMF churches only were part of the departure agreement if that came out with their bishops. It was the bishops that were involved in this.

I cannot find anything in writing. It appears to have been some kind of unwritten agreement. As far as I know, those who were an actual party to this are no longer available for comment.

Clayton Shenk (who was one of the original pastors part of the Keystone Fellowship when it just an association of LMC pastors) told me this; of course, he’s deceased now.

LMC and W/F long ago negotiated some deal they wouldn’t intrude on each other’s “turf”. As I understand it, since Eastern considered themselves the true successors of the LMC, they continued to respect this policy for decades, and W/F still does.

[steve-in-kville]

I think for a while KMF wasn't allowed to take on any LC churches after the original split. Not sure where I got that information though.

That was the agreement the original Keystone pastors made with LMC when they brokered the deal to withdraw.

The other congregations that also wanted out of LMC typically joined BMA.

KMF churches only were part of the departure agreement if that came out with their bishops. It was the bishops that were involved in this.

I cannot find anything in writing. It appears to have been some kind of unwritten agreement. As far as I know, those who were an actual party to this are no longer available for comment.

So did BMA get its start over the LMC/KMF split? I don't really know much about their history.

[Josh]

I believe they already were in existence but got a boost from a ready constituency.

Maybe a BMA person can correct my history.